Should i get collision insurance or not?

dont forget to buy life insurance just to be extra safe ;)

Had life insurance for years now.

Not sure how life insurance makes you safer considering you have to die to collect.

Theres two types of life insurance. Ones a fixed amount where you pay per month for XX years (i'm doing it for 20 years) and then you stop paying. When you reach 65, you will get money + interest back. If you do die before you reach 65, your family will also get a lump sum.

The second type is also fixed but at a lower monthly rate. You pay this for the rest of your life and if you dont die, you dont collect.
 
Thanks for the insurance lesson. I would have never realized annunities exist otherwise. :rolleyes: Tell me again how insurance makes you safer?
 
Thanks for the insurance lesson. I would have never realized annunities exist otherwise. :rolleyes: Tell me again how insurance makes you safer?

Insurance is most effective when you sign your policy with ink made of unicorn blood. Otherwise it doesn't work as well.
 
Thanks for the insurance lesson. I would have never realized annunities exist otherwise. :rolleyes: Tell me again how insurance makes you safer?

It doesn't make you safe, it gives safety to your family. What would my cats do if i died? With all that cash, they could live a very good/fun 10 years with it.
 
I never do on any of my vehicles. I crashed my brand new bike the first day I got it and did over half the value of the bike in damage. I had full coverage and still didn't claim it because then the insurance on all my vehicles would go up for a long time. If I destroy one in a collision that is deemed my fault, well then I guess I'll be shopping for a replacement. If the other person is at fault your insurance will cover it anyway regardless of if you have collision or not.
 
I'll be paying around 1800/year with collision or 1400/without.

Wow, your full coverage insurance rate is almost 3 bikes for me haha
 
In all of my 35+ years of bike ownership I have never had collision coverage on any bike. The only reason to have collision coverage would be because there is a loan on the bike and the bank may require it to ensure they get their money back if you total the bike and it is your fault. Since I have always paid cash for a bike, I have never needed to have collision coverage.
 
I never do on any of my vehicles. I crashed my brand new bike the first day I got it and did over half the value of the bike in damage. I had full coverage and still didn't claim it because then the insurance on all my vehicles would go up for a long time. If I destroy one in a collision that is deemed my fault, well then I guess I'll be shopping for a replacement. If the other person is at fault your insurance will cover it anyway regardless of if you have collision or not.

Did you forget you already told us that ?
And I was thinking to myself 'hmm this guy's story sounds just like the other's' lolz


Even when collision only makes a $10-20/mo difference it isn't worth it to me unless you vehicle is worth like $10k+. I'm surprised it's a $400 difference for you because it never is that much different for me. Collision only helps in an accident that is YOUR fault anyway and if you make a claim that is your fault your rates (on any vehicle) will go way up for a long time. I always just assume the insurance company will get their money back one way or another. I have 3 vehicles (2 cars and 1 bike) so if I had an at-fault claim against me I'd probably have to go down to one car and even then would probably have trouble affording insurance.

I wrecked my 650R the first day I had it and did over $4300 in damage (dealer quote). The bike cost me $8300. I had full coverage. I didn't make a claim.

If it's your only vehicle though and you don't have the cash flow (notice I said flow, not cash on hand) to fix/replace it and you need it to get to work, then it might be worthwhile.

Comprehensive, on the other hand, I do think is worth it, especially since bikes get stolen so often.

Just my opinion.
 
In all of my 35+ years of bike ownership I have never had collision coverage on any bike. The only reason to have collision coverage would be because there is a loan on the bike and the bank may require it to ensure they get their money back if you total the bike and it is your fault. Since I have always paid cash for a bike, I have never needed to have collision coverage.

Interesting aspect.
Thanks.
 
Did you forget you already told us that ?
And I was thinking to myself 'hmm this guy's story sounds just like the other's' lolz
Yes. I did. Didn't realize it was still the same thread kicking around. I fail.
 
In all of my 35+ years of bike ownership I have never had collision coverage on any bike. The only reason to have collision coverage would be because there is a loan on the bike and the bank may require it to ensure they get their money back if you total the bike and it is your fault. Since I have always paid cash for a bike, I have never needed to have collision coverage.

If you have a regular vehicle loan on the bike, then the bank will require you to have full coverage insurance. There's no "may" involved, as the bike is how they secure the loan (collateral). I once refinanced my car, in order to buy a bike, which meant that I didn't require full coverage on the bike, but did on the car. You can also get an unsecured line of credit and use it to buy a bike, if you qualify, which would mean that there's no collateral.
 
If you have a regular vehicle loan on the bike, then the bank will require you to have full coverage insurance. There's no "may" involved, as the bike is how they secure the loan (collateral). I once refinanced my car, in order to buy a bike, which meant that I didn't require full coverage on the bike, but did on the car. You can also get an unsecured line of credit and use it to buy a bike, if you qualify, which would mean that there's no collateral.

That is why I used the "may" in my comment. An unsecured line, or loan not attached to the bike will allow you to avoid having collision coverage.
 
In my opinion, no. Think of it this way, if you drop your bike and claim it, the insurance is gonna fck you. If you get into an accident and it's your fault, likelihood of you doing damage to other cars is slim. The damage will be on you whichever way you look at it. Fixing the bike on your own is better than having insurance write it off, and fcking you twice. Just be careful out there
 
It doesn't make you safe, it gives safety to your family. What would my cats do if i died? With all that cash, they could live a very good/fun 10 years with it.

Breadwinner of cats, serious business

PS. Thanks for lending me your stands that day
 
If you can ride for 3 years without smashing your bike you are laughing. If you total it this year you will cry. Do what you want.

^This...

The collision portion on my policy on a '08 GSF1250 is $87... I'd be nuts to go without.

$400 is high, but it probably has nothing to do with the bike itself... Probably your age/record etc..
 
The annual price difference is peanuts. It's the hike that will **** you if you make a claim that makes it not worth it. If you could pay your insurance, crash your bike, get a new one, and continue to pay the same rates, my answer would be much different and I'd have a new bike every year or two.

Instead, you pay out the *** for insurance, crash your bike, it doubles or triples on every vehicle you own for quite awhile. Didn't Chris Rock have a skit that explained this perfectly?

Insurance will always make their money back (from you) eventually. Might as well just pay it yourself and not deal with the hassle. Especially if you have more than 1 vehicle since the hikes apply to everything.

At least one of my accidents would've been a write off. I didn't cry. I'd rather pay the $4k now then an extra $2k every year for however many years. I know people that have at fault claims. They would've rather written off the car. At least then they wouldn't be broke just from paying their insurance rates that are now 3 times higher than they were before.

Maybe if your bike is worth $20k+ or something every year it might be worthwhile. Very few bikes hold their value like that though.
 
Last edited:
The annual price difference is peanuts. It's the hike that will **** you if you make a claim that makes it not worth it. If you could pay your insurance, crash your bike, get a new one, and continue to pay the same rates, my answer would be much different and I'd have a new bike every year or two.

Instead, you pay out the *** for insurance, crash your bike, it doubles or triples on every vehicle you own for quite awhile. Didn't Chris Rock have a skit that explained this perfectly?

Insurance will always make their money back (from you) eventually. Might as well just pay it yourself and not deal with the hassle. Especially if you have more than 1 vehicle since the hikes apply to everything.

At least one of my accidents would've been a write off. I didn't cry. I'd rather pay the $4k now then an extra $2k every year for however many years. I know people that have at fault claims. They would've rather written off the car. At least then they wouldn't be broke just from paying their insurance rates that are now 3 times higher than they were before.

Maybe if your bike is worth $20k+ or something every year it might be worthwhile. Very few bikes hold their value like that though.

I agree with you, but sometimes people can't afford to pay upfront for a new vehicle so they choose to go through insurance and pay more over the years. Its like buying a new vehicle with cash or getting a new vehicle with a loan.

Also, some insurance companies offer a one accident forgiveness, where the first at fault accident/claim does not affect insurance rates BUT the second one will be a big jump.
 
Back
Top Bottom